As for powernodes, just have IPs not effected by loss of power since CC isn't.Then, with those changes above you'd have enough time/resources to build a power pack for an obs to beacon should you be that paranoid/slow to beacon, as 15 to 28 seconds is already a lot of time ontop of having respawning marines. All imho

P.s I know its not obvious/feedback needs improvement, but as a commander you should ALWAYS keep 50 energy aside for beacon... So who wouldn't beacon for an onos in their base??

As for powernodes, just have IPs not effected by loss of power since CC isn't.Then, with those changes above you'd have enough time/resources to build a power pack for an obs to beacon should you be that paranoid/slow to beacon, as 15 to 28 seconds is already a lot of time ontop of having respawning marines. All imho

You are absolutely right that we should wait for exosuit and minigun or whatever it is going to be. But they are getting onos 10 minutes into game off of 3 harvesters I think.

This is less an issue with the onos than the opportunity cost of attacking powernodes in rooms with multiple structures. If there are only 1-2 structures in a room (think an extractor or PG), then I can usually take out the structure faster than killing the powernode. However, once you get past about 4 structures, its faster to simply kill the powernode than to kill all the structures, which is the situation in most marine bases/outposts. Potential solutions might be:

Adjust the time it takes to kill a powernode vs killing marine structures- For example, if it took 60s to kill a powernode and only 50s to kill 5 marine structures, for any room with <6 marine structures you'd target the structures instead of the powernode. You can achieve this by either increasing the time it takes to kill the powernode or decreasing the time it takes to kill marine structures

Split the powernode function into multiple mini-powernodes- For example, instead of having one powernode providing 100% of a room's power, you could split it into 4 powernodes each providing 25% of a room's power. That way, the time to disable a full rooms power would be greatly increased, making targeting individual, critical structures more important. <100% powered rooms could then have an effect on marine structures by either disabling a percentage of them (i.e. a room with 75% power could only power 75% of structures) or giving an across-the-board reduction in functionality (think slower spawning, less resource output, longer tech research time, less structure energy regen, etc).

Just had an idea.Why not make CCs provide power to a room whenever built? No one likes the power node = win game play/association, especially when its a) cheap b) power nodes are meant to represent territory lines. Consider how your base is already powered unlike every other area. All that would change is the end game would be grander. (ofc lerk spores need to either a) protect it's underbelly or b) be more effective/easier at disabling turrets. since theres no power node to disable turret farms)

Would bring back the incentive for tech points being captured again too! Would encourage forward posts to "evolve" into an established base, too.

This is less an issue with the onos than the opportunity cost of attacking powernodes in rooms with multiple structures. If there are only 1-2 structures in a room (think an extractor or PG), then I can usually take out the structure faster than killing the powernode. However, once you get past about 4 structures, its faster to simply kill the powernode than to kill all the structures, which is the situation in most marine bases/outposts. Potential solutions might be:

Adjust the time it takes to kill a powernode vs killing marine structures- For example, if it took 60s to kill a powernode and only 50s to kill 5 marine structures, for any room with <6 marine structures you'd target the structures instead of the powernode. You can achieve this by either increasing the time it takes to kill the powernode or decreasing the time it takes to kill marine structures

Split the powernode function into multiple mini-powernodes- For example, instead of having one powernode providing 100% of a room's power, you could split it into 4 powernodes each providing 25% of a room's power. That way, the time to disable a full rooms power would be greatly increased, making targeting individual, critical structures more important. <100% powered rooms could then have an effect on marine structures by either disabling a percentage of them (i.e. a room with 75% power could only power 75% of structures) or giving an across-the-board reduction in functionality (think slower spawning, less resource output, longer tech research time, less structure energy regen, etc).

Why not have each structure use an internal generator that powers it temporarily for like 10 seconds then it can't be used again until like 2 minutes later. It would only activate when the power went out, and would only charge up if the room itself was powered. It seems a little far-fetched that a military force would rely on purely one power system, also.

Why not have each structure use an internal generator that powers it temporarily for like 10 seconds then it can't be used again until like 2 minutes later. It would only activate when the power went out, and would only charge up if the room itself was powered. It seems a little far-fetched that a military force would rely on purely one power system, also.

This is just getting way too convoluted and complicated at this point.

How about for starters, don't place powernodes in the most vulnerable spot possible????

Seriously all the marine base power nodes are just way out in the open.

Why not give the CC another gimick similar to nano shield and construct. If the CC has energy stored it will sacrifice stored energy to power buildings

Like the power pack you click on CC energy button like nano shield and click on a building and you see a blue line connect to a building when power goes out that building will use CC energy till it's gone or powers restored.

If they made an alien life form that was twice as powerful as the Onos in every respect, but it required that you be at 100 pRes for 20 consecutive minutes in order to evolve into one, when people saw it they would still scream imbalance.

I think UWE should ignore the COD kiddies that can't see past their own personal experienced in a game. Just my personal opinion though.

If they made an alien life form that was twice as powerful as the Onos in every respect, but it required that you be at 100 pRes for 20 consecutive minutes in order to evolve into one, when people saw it they would still scream imbalance.

I think UWE should ignore the COD kiddies that can't see past their own personal experienced in a game. Just my personal opinion though.

Maybe you should be banned for trolling nearly every thread you post on. Just my personal opinion though.

If they made an alien life form that was twice as powerful as the Onos in every respect, but it required that you be at 100 pRes for 20 consecutive minutes in order to evolve into one, when people saw it they would still scream imbalance.

I think UWE should ignore the COD kiddies that can't see past their own personal experienced in a game. Just my personal opinion though.

I believe the point is for there not to be a perpetual stalemate with Marines turtleing up.

Having said that, the current build seems way more balanced than the previous one with probably a slight edge given to Marines.

IMHO, in this current build, Jetpacks seem to be the marine trump card... and yet they consistently seem to be one of the last things researched.

Now perhaps its just me, but commanders don't seem to adjust tactics too well... they kinda have their favorite strategy and stick to it with a zealot's fervor.

This is all pug experience though

I've had summit locked down with 2 IPs, 1 advanced armory, 1 arms lab, 1 turret factory, 2 observatories maximum turrets, all the weapons, phase gates in BOTH Data Core and Flight Control. In other words, I had 4 IPs, 2 AAs, 2 arms labs, 4 observatories etc. Aliens had 3 resource towers the whole map. Thus, I had two FULL bases in both hives, while aliens had sub access. THis means we had 6 resource towers, they had 3 (which we killed and they rebuilt over and over).

3 onos took out flight control even after beaconing. We killed all of them when they attacked data core, and we rebuilt flight control. Then 3 more onos appeared and ended the game the same way -- hit power node.

The BEST PART was that I put power packs on the observatories and IPs in data core and it didn't help because onos cannot be killed with stomp.

I'm not saying Onos is ridiculous because we lost a game like that, but I'm saying its ridiculous because we lost a game like that.

Especially since the alien team said afterwards that "we didn't even plan to rush at the same time."

I'm not saying Onos is ridiculous because we lost a game like that, but I'm saying its ridiculous because we lost a game like that.

Considering the amount of detail that went into explaining the scenario, yes you are.

If you want to argue balance, it needs to be done from a purely theoretical point of view. Practical evidence is always biased and therefore inadmissible. Though the practical evidence will usually alert you to the existence of theoretical evidence.

Here's an idea. Instead of bickering, how about we all just open up Decoda and change values yourselves and test them on your own listen server (grab a buddy if needed), then provide a proposal with viable information that will back up that change. Complaining about it on the forums doesn't help anyone; just alerts us of a problem and not of potential solutions to the notable problem.

In playtests it's similar to what this thread is. Yet it's hard for others to understand how to utilize the influence they have on this game through a productive manner. For example: the bile bomb is weak as hell right now. I provided feedback and examples from last Sunday's matches along with a proposal on changes that were made to my own game client and tested against numerous structures and situations. Those changes went in shortly after it was read.

So in short: You have the tools to test values and make your own proposals. It would be more efficient to put effort into a write up about changing something is bad rather than typing out a complaint.

Here's an idea. Instead of bickering, how about we all just open up Decoda and change values yourselves and test them on your own listen server, then provide a proposal with viable information that will back up that change. Complaining about it on the forums doesn't help anyone; just alerts us of a problem and not of potential solutions to the notable problem.

In playtests it's similar to what this thread is. Yet it's hard for others to understand how to utilize the influence they have on this game through a productive manner. For example: the bile bomb is weak as hell right now. I provided feedback and examples from last Sunday's matches along with a proposal on changes that were made to my own game client and tested against numerous structures and situations. Those changes went in shortly after it was read.

So in short: You have the tools to test values and make your own proposals. It would be more efficient to put effort into a write up about changing something is bad rather than typing out a complaint.

And how much do I get paid to playtest and do all of this??????

I'm playing the game on pubs. I see how it plays out in the everyday use of this game -- not in a closed group of 16 regular players who all know each other. I make a post about it.

I would say thats good use of the forum. If I am wrong about this I'll gladly stop.

As for powernodes, just have IPs not effected by loss of power since CC isn't.Then, with those changes above you'd have enough time/resources to build a power pack for an obs to beacon should you be that paranoid/slow to beacon, as 15 to 28 seconds is already a lot of time ontop of having respawning marines. All imho

P.s I know its not obvious/feedback needs improvement, but as a commander you should ALWAYS keep 50 energy aside for beacon... So who wouldn't beacon for an onos in their base??

Oh I beaconed -- didn't help.

Thats why I made this post -- We did everything right including Jetpacks and to no avail. I've commanded hundreds maybe even a thousand games in NS2.

Considering the amount of detail that went into explaining the scenario, yes you are.

If you want to argue balance, it needs to be done from a purely theoretical point of view. Practical evidence is always biased and therefore inadmissible. Though the practical evidence will usually alert you to the existence of theoretical evidence.

To be fair there needs to be some practical evidence. Pure theoretical evidence is why people are running around the forums like headless chickens screaming about 8 minutes Onos, when in reality it's double that in most games.

I'm playing the game on pubs. I see how it plays out in the everyday use of this game -- not in a closed group of 16 regular players who all know each other. I make a post about it.

I would say thats good use of the forum. If I am wrong about this I'll gladly stop.

0, just like us. I can also tell you that sabahell does value changing on her own time (maybe with a buddy), especially with those latest lerk values. You can see problems, you can point them out, but give some thoughts on what could be improved, suggest new values, all that jazz, rather than being a pure rager :).

To be fair there needs to be some practical evidence. Pure theoretical evidence is why people are running around the forums like headless chickens screaming about 8 minutes Onos, when in reality it's double that in most games.

2 things:

1) You just seriously responded to that post. Which was not only a troll but rambling gibberish.

Especially since the alien team said afterwards that "we didn't even plan to rush at the same time."

Having given up all hope on every lifeform between Skulk and Onos, I can say that it's slightly amusing how the Onos is creating these impromptu rush scenarios due to taking out the power node. Not exactly the same, but a lot of the time I can just walk into Marine Start once or twice, take out the power node after 30 seconds, and have my team follow-up with a rush right then and there. I like how it's creating new opportunities to end games.

What I don't like is the cloaking device that UWE installed on the Onos, because it's enabling Onos to waltz through Marine Start, chew on the power node for 30 seconds, and walk away at full HP. I mean if you're going to let the Onos be completely invisible, at least remove their communications scrambling device. It's hard enough for Marines to notice an invisible Onos, let alone deal with the inability to use their comms.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I'm unsure as to why stomp was made into a passive ability. Everytime I'm in Marine Start as an Onos every Marine I see just curls up in the fetal position and starts rocking back and forth. I think it would be more balanced if this passive was changed back into an active ability and Marines were actually able to shoot at me.